pv-afsplitsers sluiten zich aan tegen wilders' motie over 'marokkaans tuig'

2026-02-04 politiek

Den Haag, woensdag, 4 februari 2026.
zeven ex-pvv-kamerleden blokkeren een motie van geert wilders en marjolein faber over denaturalisatie van ‘marokkaans tuig’. zij noemen de term misleidend en onnodig grievend. hun kritiek komt direct na de breuk met de pvv. dit verscherpt de politieke spanningen. de motie ging verder dan het pv-programma dat zij zelf onderschreven. daar was denaturalisatie alleen voor verdachten met dubbele nationaliteit en een ernstige veroordeling. nu wordt gewone taal gebruikt om beleid te dragen. mensenrechtengroeperingen en juridische experts zien juridische en morele problemen. de motie heeft nauwelijks steun in de kamer.

seven former pv members criticize wilders’ motion on ‘moroccan scum’

Seven recently separated Members of Parliament from the Party for Freedom (PVV) have issued a joint statement rejecting a parliamentary motion by Geert Wilders and Marjolein Faber [1]. The motion calls for the denaturalization and deportation of individuals labeled as ‘Moroccan scum’ [2]. The breakaway lawmakers describe the phrasing as misleading and unnecessarily offensive [3]. Their criticism marks a sharp public divergence from their former party leader just after their official split [4].

motion goes beyond pv election program commitments

Annelotte Lammers of Groep-Markuszower stated the motion takes ten steps beyond the PVV’s own election platform, which the seven members previously endorsed [5]. That program supported denaturalization only for dual nationals convicted of serious crimes [6]. The current proposal lacks such legal constraints and applies ethnic labeling broadly [7]. Lammers emphasized that not all Moroccans living in the Netherlands are criminals, nor are all offenders of Moroccan descent [8].

legal and moral concerns raised by critics

Human rights organizations and legal experts have voiced strong objections to the motion’s approach [9]. Blanket denaturalization based on ethnicity raises significant legal barriers under international and constitutional law [10]. Experts warn it could violate non-discrimination principles protected by the European Convention on Human Rights [11]. Legal scholars argue nationality cannot be revoked without due process, regardless of inflammatory labels [12].

motion fails to gain broad support in parliament

The motion stood little chance of adoption according to parliamentary analysis [13]. Beyond the PVV, only Forum for Democracy voted in favor during the chamber vote [14]. All other parties rejected the proposal, including center-right and conservative factions [15]. The lack of coalition partners underscores its isolation within broader legislative strategy [16]. Critics label it symbolic rather than policy-oriented [17].

Bronnen

PVV motie